The Los Angeles Times' editorial board says California should not post armed guards at every publicly funded school in the state.

The board's commentary takes aim at Assembly Bill 2067, which would require armed security officers at all public schools including elementary and charter schools, with the state paying an estimated $1 billion per year.

"Even if the state has an additional $1 billion to hand to schools, it's unclear whether this would be the wisest expenditure," the board wrote.

"Perhaps this money could be better spent providing improved medical and mental healthcare to children, more nutritious food or outstanding recreational facilities," the board wrote.

The board said that while school shootings are "terrifying, abhorrent and a sign of something extremely troubling in our society," they are not common.

David Ropeik, a Harvard scholar who studies risk, said that the chances of a child being shot and killed in school is far lower than the chance that the child will have an accident, catch a potentially fatal disease, or suffer a possibly deadly injury at school, the board noted.

The editorial board pointed out that evidence is lacking that one single armed officer could prevent a random shooting.

"Looking for multipronged answers to frightening new questions about safety" is the preferable approach, the LA Times board wrote.